Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Tej Singh Bhargav vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 13 October, 2023
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:35126] (1 of 4) [CW-16329/2023]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16329/2023
1. Tej Singh Bhargav S/o Shri Prem Singh Bharbav, Aged
About 61 Years, 52-Marudhara Nagar, Pawan Puri,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
2. Tabssum Aziz W/o Shri Mohd. Yusuf Aziz, Aged About 61
Years, Ii-E-7, Jai Narayan Vyas Colony, District Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
3. Ajay Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Prem Kant Sharma, Aged
About 65 Years, Sudarshna Nagar, District Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
4. Lalit Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Dev Krishna Sharma, Aged
About 60 Years, Marudhara Nagar, Bikaner.
5. Subhash Chandra Bishnoi S/o Shri Ram Narayan Bishnoi,
Aged About 60 Years, Karni Nagar, Lal Garh, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
6. Mool Singh S/o Shri Ram Singh, Aged About 60 Years,
Karni Nagar, Lal Garh, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
7. Rajendra Prasad Jain S/o Shri Mohan Lal Jain, Aged About
67 Years, Rani Bazar, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
8. Ravindra Nath Tyagi S/o Shri Triloki Nath Tyagi, Aged
About 61 Years, Gupta Prasad Colony, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
9. Manju Bala Tiwari W/o Shri Girdhar Gopal Gaur, Aged
About 62 Years, Jai Narayan Vyas Colony, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
10. Satya Narayan Vyas S/o Shri Shyam Sundar Vyas, Aged
About 61 Years, Nathusar Bas, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
11. Bhanwar Lal Pareek S/o Shri Satya Narayan Pareek, Aged
About 65 Years, Rani Bazar, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
12. Madhav Kumar Modak S/o Shri Vinayak Narayan Modak,
Aged About 63 Years, Pawan Puri, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
13. Umesh Chandra Bhargav S/o Shri Kailash Chandra
Bhargav, Aged About 60 Years, Shiv Bari, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
14. Sanjay Kumar Roy S/o Late Shri Rajendra Prasad Roy,
Aged About 61 Years, Jai Narayan Vyas Colony, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
[2023:RJ-JD:35126] (2 of 4) [CW-16329/2023]
15. Ahshan Ali S/o Shri Nisar Mohd., Aged About 60 Years,
Rampura Basti, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
16. Akhtar Ali Zaidi S/o Shri Gulam Mohd. Zaidi, Aged About
63 Years, Sarvodaya Basti, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
17. Mouji Ram S/o Shri Mahipat Saharan, Aged About 61
Years, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
18. Ashok Kumar Taneja S/o Shri Devraj Taneja, Aged About
62 Years, Mukta Prasad Nagar, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
19. Nathu Ram Meghwal S/o Shri Gumana Ram Meghwal,
Aged About 62 Years, Mukta Prasad Nagar, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
20. Smt. Susheela Sharma W/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad
Sharma, Aged About 64 Years, Mukta Prasad Nagar,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Secondary
Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
4. Principal Secretary, Fiance Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pramendra Bohra
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
13/10/2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a
[2023:RJ-JD:35126] (3 of 4) [CW-16329/2023]
judgment rendered in a bunch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil
Writ Petition No.21/2020 "Vijay Singh Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors. and other connected matters decided on
21.07.2023 in the following terms:-
"41. Hence, looking to the binding effect of above
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of C.P.
Mundinamani (supra) and All India Judges Association
(supra), it is held that the petitioners would be entitled to
get the benefits of increment falling due on 1 st July on
account of their conduct for requisite length of time i.e.
one year. The petitioners would be entitled to get
notional payment on 1st July, notwithstanding their
superannuation on 30th June.
42. The respondents are directed to consider the case
of the petitioners afresh in the light of the observations
made hereinabove and thereafter grant notional
increment to the petitioners. The petitioners' pension
would consequently be refixed. The appropriate orders be
issued and the arrears of pension be paid to the
petitioners within a period of three months from the date
of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
43. With the aforesaid directions, all these petitions
stand dispose of.
44. Stay applications and all applications (pending, if
any) also stand disposed of.
45. The parties are left free to bear their own costs."
Learned counsel further submits that the controversy has
also been set at rest by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of
The Director (Admn. And HR) KPTCL & Ors. Vs. C.P.
Mundinamani & Ors. : Civil Appeal No.2471/2023 affirming
the view taken in the case of Vijay Singh (supra).
In this view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioners
seeks liberty to approach the respondents by way of filing a
detailed representation for redressal of their grievances.
[2023:RJ-JD:35126] (4 of 4) [CW-16329/2023]
Considering the judgment of this Court in Vijay Singh
(supra) as well as the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in
C.P. Mundinamani (supra), the respondents are directed to
consider the representation of the petitioners and decide the same
in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court as well as this Court in the cases of C.P. Mundinamani
(supra) & Vijay Singh (supra), preferably within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
The order has been passed based on the submissions made
in the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the
veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case,
the averments made therein are found to be correct, the
petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
135-Shahenshah/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
